“Do you really want to identify yourself with those who inhabit the sewers of the FR community”?

Too late.

And IIRC it was Wacka-doodle-doo that was whining about being called wacka-doodle-doo not all that long ago.

I wouldn’t sweat it too terribly much GGG, the residual DC/DU crowd you see stalking you now that’s already been beat down by JR by my count at least twice in as many weeks, are simply too incompetent to get themselves banned.

It’s hard to imagine who makes more fun of them at this point, FReepers or their whack-job brethren at DC that are at least competent enough to do what they set out to do: get banned from FR. :)

We’ll have to come up with a differentiation from the normal liberal fare...

let’s see...something with homeless in the handle...

and what are those little fishies that swim alongside sharks looking for some scraps...?

51
posted on 10/28/2009 4:26:09 PM PDT
by tpanther
(Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)

It’s a hoot to see you and your ilk pretend to be “real conservatives”.

And make stuff up about freepathons and most everything else.

But do keep marginalizing yourselves and ignoring JR.

Who knows, maybe one day you’ll get your wish and hoot it up over on DC after you finally get yourself banned!

Or not.

You’re NEVER EVER going to get to decide what is or isn’t “acceptable science”, (or for that matter anything else) not only on here on FR but ANYWHERE that will ever matter.

You’re not going to hijack every thread and turn it into a poo flinging contest because several people have already indicated to GGG they enjoy the articles and many discussions continue on despite you and the other buckets of poo.

People that DO matter still make fantastic posts and have been around long enough to recognize it’s best to avoid you.

But there is that one purpose you DO serve for those that are brand new to conservatism and/or FR, and that is the concept of liberals simply having no shame or self-respect.

And hey! It’s an important purpose!

56
posted on 10/28/2009 5:56:18 PM PDT
by tpanther
(Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)

Right you are... the only chance we’re left with, then is to minimize them. Wish I had a shrink ray.

But alas; all we’re left with as a strategy is to unite and conquer. It’s worked before. Listening to Rush and his commentary on Reagan today made me feel hopeful in a way and helpless in another. Rush is saying it right. We need a common, conservative message. I think we’re capable of that as a group of conservatives, but without a leader that shares those views and has no fear of failure (not to mention a lack of skeletons in the proverbial closet) we’re just screaming in the desert.

Who’s out there with both the personality and the message?

61
posted on 10/28/2009 6:48:21 PM PDT
by Gordon Greene
(www.fracturedrepublic.com - Evo's place much faith in something for which there is no proof. Crazy!)

YOU ARE THE LUNATIC FRINGE, xcamel. But as such, you will probably never grasp that fact. As I said before, your days are numbered here on FR. Your addictive and self-destructive personality has no choice but to cross the line and get yourself banned. Although, I have to hand it to you for lasting this long, as you are far more looney and offensive than Coyoteman ever was.

[[Yet effective means, DDT, of preventing malaria spread and infection only costs a few dollars per person per year. But where are the Malaria Quilts and ribbons on trees?]]

Great point- I’d doen a few reports on the NON threat of DDT, and how it too became a celebrity cause to ban the substance while ignoring hte fact that people were dropping dead from a fully preventable problem- IT IS JUST SIMPLY STUNNING the hypocrisy and mentality of the far left wirth their causes- They are NOT concerned about ANYTHING but undermining conservative values, and the FACT that they oppose DDT while approving more funding for research into a lifestyle disease like Aids shows they are infact depopulation advocates who could care less about people who are TRULY suffering from diseases and maladies that they have no control over- their hypocrisy is simply stunning

Are you saying that equating lunacy with xcamel is an insults to lunatics everywhere? I had no idea. From now on, whenever I refer to xcamel’s state of mind, I be sure to make it absolutely clear that she is a sub-lunatic! My humblest apologies, sir!

Notice how leftists try to hold conservatives “to their own standards” but have none of their own. Same thing with atheists arguing with Christians.

The funny thing about the left and atheists, though, is that they don’t understand the concept of “sinful man” and therefore can’t understand that we KNOW we can’t live up to that standard, thus the need for a Savior.

74
posted on 10/29/2009 5:20:56 AM PDT
by MrB
(The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)

You and your ilk do not exist in a vacuum, and youre driving more people away from FR that you could ever imagine.

If anyone is driving people away from FR, it's people who behave like you, who lash out at everyone around them like an out of control toddler throwing a temper tantrum, hitting and spitting and calling them names like *poopyhead*.

I haven't seen you post one nice post to anyone ever and your posting history bears that out for all to see.

79
posted on 10/29/2009 7:45:20 AM PDT
by metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)

it’s probably best to just ignore the trolls like xcamel- she isn’t interested in intellectual honesty- only in gettign a rise out of people— it’s a sad little life that thrives on attention, and revels in pulling people into futile arguments- the goal of a troll is to drag topics offtopic for pages- just keep reporting her troll behavior- perhaps, with any luck, she’ll go the way of al lthe past FR trolls who were booted (then turn around and play the martyr lol)- don’t bother asking her questions- she isn’t itnerested in engagign you or anyone else in honest discussion, as she’s more than amply proven time and time again

Playtime trolls are relatively easy to spot, but they may not be apparent to the naive user. There isn’t a single set of characteristics that applies to playtime trolls, but you can look for some or all of the following signs:

a lack of buy-in to the list philosophy or values
generally low level of activity, with sudden spurts of interaction - or perhaps a new persona that has strong opinions on controversial subjects

a mixture of friendly posts with a confrontational style of interaction

the use of provocative language and sweeping generalisations about certain topics or categories of people

a lack of in-depth understanding of the topic

a lack of personal information

a lack of a genuinely unique perspective on the topic

a lack of humour

restarting topics that have already been done

use of language that encourages the dialogue to enter topics that are controversial and likely to upset some team members

the use of an attention-seeking gimmick (e.g.: “I was once exploited by an XYZ”)

inconsistencies in the style and nature of the post and any proclaimed information (e.g.: claiming to be a child but writing with an adult style; claiming to be adult, but writing with a childish grammatical construction).

also note that trolls often seem to use free email services (such as hotmail.com) or have email addresses ending in .edu. However, trolls could be virtually anyone, and the email address is no guide as to whether the persona is a bona fide user or not.

To counteract playtime trolls, the best action is to ignore them. If you are convinced they are trolls, then you can advise the list manager. However, if other group members respond to the suspected troll’s posts, then you may have to consider some of the responses outlined for tactical or strategic trolls.

Do you agree with GGG’s contentions about HIV-AIDS that he prominently posts on his profile page? I ask because of your scientific and pharma background. I am genuinely curious - and I’m sure GGG is as well.

What if I told you, "The Judeo-Christian moral basis, to a very large degree?" Because that's what I would tell you. Is that somehow impossible to believe?

I grew up in "the church." My parents instilled good values in me. I respect the laws of the society I live in and if I decided that I no longer wanted to follow said laws, I'd be in trouble. From a self-preservation stand point, why would I want to do that? Being good to people simply feels good and I know it's the right thing to do. Would you concede this is possible?

You could say that I am the way I am due to my childhood with the church and my very religious parents. That would be fair... So I guess the test will be my children in 40 years. Stay tuned. : )

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.